Categories
Public Forums
Speak out
RE: What does China stand for?/ I AGREE WITH YOU, MA'M
|
Author:
|
Time:
03/11/2008 13:40
|
Text:
'More work more pay' was the straightforward Chinese way of referring to the Marxist principle of 'From each according to his ability, to each according to his work'. Thus, reward for labor was wholly equal during the socialist transition. When Communism was achieved (it was achieved, believe me), the conditions for 'distributing according to need' was satisfied and people have sufficient 'communist spirit' to accept an egalitarian ethic. From the time of the Great Leap onwards, wage differentials were narrowed and increasing use of moral than material incentives stimulated labour productivity.
Higher wages and bonuses led to greater efficiency. It was realized by Chinese reformers because they were accompanied by substantial changes in economic management and in the running of industry and commerce. The old Soviet Union imploded because of assaults on two prime indicators of progress towards socialism-market socialism and democracy-closing the door for growth of a substantial market sector and the expansion of collective and private ownership.
Critics argue that the planning process of the old Soviet Union (which I presume is your suggested model and nothing else) had led to the fixing of grandiose targets and excessive accumulation of funds at the expense of living standards. By setting targets in terms of quantitative output (which is stupid, by the way) and value it had encouraged stockpiling of raw materials and the production of poor-quality goods to meet the norm. This is preposterous 'centralized planning'.
As the 'market' in China lost its 'subsidiary' relationship to the plan, so collective and private enterprise began to assume a more equal relationship until the former became dominant and on its way to liberal free market economy stalling her 'implosion' as the old Soviet Union did.
> I'm a strong supporter of the government of People's China,
> but I have this sense that the top leadership and even the
> masses themselves, are lacking a sense of what they really
> stand for, and what China's place in the world is. I
> generally support the actual political and economic
> policies of China, but am uneasy about the lack of ideology
> behind them. Of course I'm not advocating a return to the
> excesses of Mao's day but lack of national spirit makes
> China vulnerable to dangerous currents. Just look at how
> fertile ground China is for the Falun Gong cult,
> conservative Neo-Confucianism and various Christian groups.
> Of course its not our place as foreigners to meddle in the
> domestic polices of any other Socialist nation. But I
> progressives around the world do have a role to play in
> shaping the purpose of China in the world, just as China
> plays an enormous role in influencing progresives.
>
|
Message threads
| Topic: |
Author: |
Time: |
|
|
|
Kamran Heiss
|
02/15/2008 23:27
|
|
|
|
|
03/11/2008 13:40
|
|
|
